4 ms·

How did this rule come about, that you need to own a house before you can have a child?

mullingitover 13y ago
You don't. However, having a house, a family, and a retirement fund was a realistic goal in generations past, and it's not really a 'middle class' option anymore.
- stefan_kendall3 13y ago
  It's not an achievable goal in San Francisco, but not everyone lives in San Francisco.
  - geebee 13y ago
    It's semi-achievable in San Francisco. It takes two incomes, and you have to make sacrifices. In SF, applications developers, dental hygienists, and registered nurses all earn, on average, around 100k a year. Two of them together would together earn about $220k a year in SF. That's workable.
    - aspensmonster 13y ago
      >...about $220k a year in SF. That's workable. That's depressing. Sure, it might be workable too. But depressing. That's a little over a million dollars in FIVE YEARS. Ok ok, one or two more for final take-home pay. And that's still merely "workable" rather than "Oh boy we've got it made!"
    - stefan_kendall3 13y ago
      If the goal is "Buy and own a house", pulling in $220/year pre-tax probably isn't enough to get the job done. Unless you're living extremely scarcely in the meantime.
aspensmonster 13y ago
I think the meat of the issue is right here: >It would basically be a choice between having children or having a retirement.
sigzero 13y ago
It isn't a "rule" per se. It is a "nice to have".
analog31 13y ago
Not necessarily owning a house, but a person at least needs to live in a neighborhood with good schools, which tends to mean paying more for housing.
MartinCron 13y ago
It's very easy to fall into the notion that you need to have ALL of your ducks in a row before having (planned) children. My wife and I called it "the tyranny of the ducks" and eventually learned to push back a bit. In our case, it was not freaking out over putting a car seat in the back of a small 2-door car instead of a big 4-door car.
- aspensmonster 13y ago
  Of all the ducks, I think the number of doors on the car isn't that high on the priority list :P However, ensuring that you can still afford to pay all the bills for months --or years, preferably-- on end in the event that your source of income disappears... that seems to be the most important of the ducks. Whether it's a home you own or six months' mortgage/rent is just details.
  - MartinCron 13y ago
    Of all the ducks, I think the number of doors on the car isn't that high on the priority list :P Have you ever tried to put an infant car seat in the back of a 1994 Mazda MX-6 coupe? It might change your priority list.
- sentenza 13y ago
  I find it to be one of the most horrible misconceptions about life that you have to be securely "settled" before having kids. Many older new parents (aruound 35-40) I observe struggle a lot more than we (30) do with raising small children. People tend to underestimate both the amount of stress that small children are and the gradual reduction of stress capacity that comes with age. You are good at pushing yourself to the limit? That's great. How do you cope with 24/7 low-level stress for months without _any_ break? My wife and I decided to do the kids thing early in life (relative to other academics) and now are finished with our family planning while yet having to reach any sort of "steady career-path". Best choice ever. But I must add that I do this with the strong social safety net of Germany in my back. I'll never be homeless, I'll never go hungry and my children will get an excellent education, _no matter what_.

You don't. However, having a house, a family, and a retirement fund was a realistic goal in generations past, and it's not really a 'middle class' option anymore.

stefan_kendall3 13y ago
It's not an achievable goal in San Francisco, but not everyone lives in San Francisco.
- geebee 13y ago
  It's semi-achievable in San Francisco. It takes two incomes, and you have to make sacrifices. In SF, applications developers, dental hygienists, and registered nurses all earn, on average, around 100k a year. Two of them together would together earn about $220k a year in SF. That's workable.
  - aspensmonster 13y ago
    >...about $220k a year in SF. That's workable. That's depressing. Sure, it might be workable too. But depressing. That's a little over a million dollars in FIVE YEARS. Ok ok, one or two more for final take-home pay. And that's still merely "workable" rather than "Oh boy we've got it made!"
  - stefan_kendall3 13y ago
    If the goal is "Buy and own a house", pulling in $220/year pre-tax probably isn't enough to get the job done. Unless you're living extremely scarcely in the meantime.

aspensmonster 13y ago

I think the meat of the issue is right here: >It would basically be a choice between having children or having a retirement.

sigzero 13y ago

It isn't a "rule" per se. It is a "nice to have".

analog31 13y ago

Not necessarily owning a house, but a person at least needs to live in a neighborhood with good schools, which tends to mean paying more for housing.

MartinCron 13y ago

It's very easy to fall into the notion that you need to have ALL of your ducks in a row before having (planned) children. My wife and I called it "the tyranny of the ducks" and eventually learned to push back a bit. In our case, it was not freaking out over putting a car seat in the back of a small 2-door car instead of a big 4-door car.

aspensmonster 13y ago
Of all the ducks, I think the number of doors on the car isn't that high on the priority list :P However, ensuring that you can still afford to pay all the bills for months --or years, preferably-- on end in the event that your source of income disappears... that seems to be the most important of the ducks. Whether it's a home you own or six months' mortgage/rent is just details.
- MartinCron 13y ago
  Of all the ducks, I think the number of doors on the car isn't that high on the priority list :P Have you ever tried to put an infant car seat in the back of a 1994 Mazda MX-6 coupe? It might change your priority list.
sentenza 13y ago
I find it to be one of the most horrible misconceptions about life that you have to be securely "settled" before having kids. Many older new parents (aruound 35-40) I observe struggle a lot more than we (30) do with raising small children. People tend to underestimate both the amount of stress that small children are and the gradual reduction of stress capacity that comes with age. You are good at pushing yourself to the limit? That's great. How do you cope with 24/7 low-level stress for months without _any_ break? My wife and I decided to do the kids thing early in life (relative to other academics) and now are finished with our family planning while yet having to reach any sort of "steady career-path". Best choice ever. But I must add that I do this with the strong social safety net of Germany in my back. I'll never be homeless, I'll never go hungry and my children will get an excellent education, _no matter what_.